Firm Aims to Clone Embryos for Stem Cells

URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48618-2001Jul11.html

Date accessed: 02 August 2001

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 12, 2001; Page A01

After more than a year of quiet and careful preparation, scientists at a Massachusetts biotechnology company have started a series of experiments aimed at creating cloned human embryos or embryo-like entities from which embryonic stem cells could be derived.

Confirmation of the effort late yesterday by scientists and ethicists affiliated with the company -- Advanced Cell Technology of Worcester -- constitutes the first open acknowledgment by any research group in this country that it is trying to create cloned human entities. The only other such reported effort worldwide was by Korean scientists in 1998, but that work was never repeated or confirmed.

If the Massachusetts experiment is successful, it would be the first time that scientists have used cloning technology to turn a single human cell into an embryo as a source of stem cells -- though whether it would actually be an embryo with all the potential to grow into a person remains a matter of scientific and semantic debate.

As of last night, scientists were still conducting the work and would not report whether they had been successful. "Scientific results should be published in scientific journals," said Michael West, the company's president and chief executive, who discussed the effort in response to queries. West said he wanted to open a serious national discussion about the ethics of such work. The company is opposed to the work being used in any way to try to clone a person, he added.

On the basis of preparatory work with animal cells, company officials said they believed the cloning effort would lead to the most practical and ethical means of producing highly coveted stem cells, which hold great promise for the treatment of various conditions.

The statements from company scientists and ethicists came just one day after researchers in Virginia made the controversial announcement that they had harvested stem cells from embryos they had created solely for research, as opposed to using spare fertility clinic embryos slated for destruction as several ethics groups have recommended. In the Virginia work, the embryos were made not by cloning but by traditional in vitro fertilization (IVF) involving sperm and eggs.

Several experts said the Massachusetts effort was sure to put additional pressure on President Bush, who is considering how to settle a heated national debate over whether federal funds should be used for any research on embryonic stem cells. Proponents argue that stem cells could eventually provide cures for a range of diseases, while opponents say it is unethical to destroy potential human life.

"They're really raising the stakes here," said Richard Doerflinger of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, which opposes federal support for any kind of embryo research. "In two days, it's amazing we've had two announcements of drops down the slippery slope. We don't think there's a stopping point once you start down this road."

Others, however, wondered whether by pushing the boundaries, the new revelations would give Bush more "wiggle room" to give a green light to tamer versions of stem cell research while banning the intentional creation of embryos for research, whether by IVF or cloning.

The administration has already made clear its opposition to the cloning of human embryos, and has expressed support for a bill that would ban the practice in both the private and public sectors.

Advanced Cell scientists and several experts sitting on the company's ethics advisory board yesterday said the company had gone to great lengths to design a research program that had the highest odds of leading to cures and the least chance of crossing moral boundaries.

The work is based on the presumption, held by many scientists, that the best way to create stem cells for therapeutic purposes may be to custom-produce batches of them for individual patients through cloning. That way the cells will be genetically identical to the patient and will not be rejected as foreign.

The idea is to fuse a single cell from an adult (in the future, the patient) with a donated human egg that has had its own genes removed, to make what is essentially an embryo. After about a week of growth, that entity is destroyed to retrieve the stem cells, which can then be made into whatever tissue the patient needs.

Before starting, the company created an independent ethics board with nationally recognized scientists and ethicists to develop a plan with clear moral standards. It ensured that women recruited as egg donors for the program would be fully aware that they were donating eggs for cloning research and that they would not benefit from the work. The company even went so far as to seek donors in areas not served by fertility clinics to avoid competing for eggs that might otherwise be donated for baby-making.

The group has debated at length whether there needs to be a new term developed for the embryo-like entity created by cloning. Some believe that since it is not produced by fertilization and is not going to be allowed to develop into a fetus, it would be useful to call the cells something less inflammatory than an embryo.

"We're not trying to evade anything here," said Ronald M. Green, director of Dartmouth College's ethics institute and chair of the company's advisory board. "But think about it. There was a time when a 'mother' was the genetic mother, the gestational mother, and the birth mother. But now technology like surrogate motherhood is separating out things that used to go together. The same is true for what we've been calling the 'embryo.' "

Nonetheless, the company has made great efforts to ensure the security of any embryos or embryo-like creations that result from the work. Bodyguards have been employed whenever the cells have been transported, and video cameras are mounted around the lab to discourage anyone from trying to steal the microscopic balls of cells and implant them into a woman's womb, where they might have the potential to grow into a baby.

The last thing the company wants, officials said, is to strengthen the cause of human cloning proponents such as Panos Zavos, the Kentucky scientist who has said he hopes to clone someone, or the Raelians, a religious community that believes humans are clones of aliens and are meant to clone themselves in the future. Neither of those groups has claimed to have created a cloned human embryo.

"We've been chewing and stewing about how to do this right," said advisory board member and Harvard professor Ann Kieffling.

Others said they were glad to see so much consideration of the issues in advance, but said it would be preferable for those discussions to occur in public before such scientific work begins.

"It's a very controversial area of research and I think total transparency in advance of undertaking the research would be helpful for developing and retaining the confidence of the public and of the policy makers," said LeRoy Walters of Georgetown University's Kennedy Institute of Ethics.

Categories: 31. Stem Cells, 33. Cloning